Abstract
The branch of harmonic science called ‘canonics’ is rarely discussed outside specialist literature in Greek antiquity. Two exceptions are discussed in this paper: one reference to the science and another to its practitioners, both in non-specialist texts (Philo of Alexandria, De opificio mundi 96; Plutarch, Quaestiones convivalesiii.9). Because both texts contain erroneous claims given under the authority of canonics, the interpretation of these references is problematic. The two passages are discussed and compared in an attempt to account for the errors contained in them, and to expose the rhetorical aims of each author and the methods by which the technical terms and concepts of an ancient science could be made to serve very different ends in a non-scientific context.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
